1. “The students’ most inmost morality remains fundamentally directed toward obedience rather than autonomy.” According to Anyon, a students’ inclination toward obedience or autonomy is dependent on that student’s socio-economic background. The upper-class students are allowed the autonomous learning, while the lower classes are forced into the obedience training. Shor is suggests that students learn best in a class that focuses on participation, leading to autonomous learning; unfortunately, most teachers, especially in lower socio-economic schools, are not based on a participatory model, and thus perpetuate the classic obedience training.
2. “Through day-to-day lessons, teaching links the students’ development to the values, powers, and debates in society.” This is fundamentally why we go to school. However, depending on where we go to school, we will learn these lessons differently. I have two more thoughts about this quote. The first is that the development of the “values, powers and debates,” will assimilate all students (rich or poor) into Delipit’s culture of power. The second is that the upper and lower class students learn different values. The upper class students learn to communicate with their superiors (their teachers); while poor students learn that they need to be subservient.
3. “While schools may in fact serve the interests of many individuals, empirically they also seem to act as powerful agents in the economic and cultural reproduction of class relations.” “Schooling supports existing power and divisions in society by sorting students into a small elite destined for the top and a large mass destined for the middle and bottom.” These quotes echo the conclusions that I made after reading the Anyon piece. Schools are currently designed to perpetuate current social statuses, and vehemently protect the status quo. As it stands, the elite are destined to get richer, while to poor are destined to remain so.
I thoroughly enjoyed this reading. It was perhaps my favorite of the entire year. This reading can be connected to so many of the others that we have worked with. It is essential to interweave everything that we have read, in order to understand how education and society is constructed all around us. When pairing this article with Anyon and Oakes, it becomes obvious how students are divided. The rich and powerful elite are allowed to participate in the classroom, and get a better education, while the poor students are forced to attend schools that teach them to do nothing but obey. Bringing in Johnson, it becomes obvious that white privilege helps students get into the better schools, where they are taught in a participatory setting, which Shor claims is the best for educational purposes. Delpit tells us of the culture of power, which is constructed by the elite, who get to go to the better schools. The lower socio-economic students, who go to the lesser schools, get their dialogues silenced their entire lives, because they are not high ranking enough in the culture of power. This process repeats itself in a vicious cycle. People born into the elite culture, are destined to grow up, building copious amounts of cultural capital, and remain at the top of the social hierarchy, while those born into a poor socio-economic family will be destined to go to sub-standard schools, build little to no cultural capital, and grow up to work in menial jobs. The industrial complex system is designed to perpetuate the current social structure.
In this country, there is a shrinking middle class, and a growing gap between the rich and the poor. At this point in time, the average white family makes a median income of nearly $125,000 per year, while a black family has a median income of $17,000 per year. This is one example of how the current system is failing. If all schools offered the same level of education, as Shor suggests in a participatory classroom, then perhaps we can change the cultural deficit in the country. This is our purpose, to educate students on a level playing field, preparing them to enter the ‘real world.’ We could pour buckets of knowledge on students, making them memorize facts, or we can operate discussion based classrooms, giving more respect and responsibility to the students, as Shor and Anyon suggest, giving all students, regardless of their cultural or economic background an equal opportunity to succeed in this white, elitist, culture of capital world.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
School Visit 4
Date of Visit - 4.14.2010
This day started like all of the others, I arrived in the parking lot, and walked around to the front of the building. I arrived at the classroom a few minutes early, and the door was locked. I waited a few minutes, and Mrs. Qwerty arrived.
The class came in; most of them after the bell had already rang. It took perhaps five more minutes before they were all seated. The students were all given a ditto worksheet, which was the first quiz for the quarter. Because this quarter just started, there was no make-up work for the students to do. In theory, the students could quickly finish the quiz, and then have the rest of the class to relax. This however did not happen. Most of the students spent their time talking with one another, and not focusing on their work.
I worked with two students in this class; “Red,” and “Blue.” Blue would work on a question on the quiz, and then lose focus. I would remind him of his assignment, and get him back on track. Red worked consistently on his work. Most of the questions Red could answer himself, but some he needed help with. Blue however, needed more help. All of the questions could be found in the textbooks that the students had. There were headings in the book which corresponded with the questions in the quiz. I would find the heading, read the paragraph with the answer, and then show the student where to find the answer. It took Blue almost the entire period to finish the quiz, because he was busy talking to other students, and doing anything besides work. Red on the other hand was the first student to finish. He worked diligently, and with little help from me, he quickly finished his assignment. Mrs. Qwerty told him that because he had no make-up work (the previous quarter having recently ended) that he could read, or draw a picture. He decided to draw, and then he proceeded to show me how to make an origami balloon. He told me that he learned how to do it at an after school program, and was excited to teach me something cool that he knew.
The second class mirrored the assignment of the first class. The attitudes were different however. I do not know if it was because it was at the end of the day, or because it was close to summer vacation, but these students were off the walls crazy. I worked with one student, “Green,” who had transferred into this class from a special education classroom. I do not know why this student was in special education, he worked diligently, and intelligently. He did not seem to have any mental defect, or show, at a first encounter at least, that he belonged in a special education classroom. The other students were up walking around, and leaving the classroom without permission. Two of the students got into a fight part way through the class.
Both of the classes are starting a new project, in which they research a person of historical significance, write a report about them, and give an oral presentation about that person’s life. Mrs. Qwerty gave me a paper that all of the students needed to take home and have signed by a parent, and bring back for credit in the class. The paper had all of the due dates, requirements, and rubric for the project. I liked this idea; it gets the parents involved, so that they know when their child’s work is due, and what is expected of them.
I noticed some aspects of Anyon’s theory when I was in class. The Bat Cave subscribes to a tracking theory, with an advanced program, generic program, and special education program. The classes that I work with are both on the generic track. Almost all of these students are minorities, and are part of a working class family. Most of the students in the advanced program are white, or Asian. Everyone else is left behind in the generic or special education level. The conditions of the materials in the generic level classes are in bad shape. All of the books are tattered, and many do not have covers. The students are not allowed to take the books out of the classroom for two reasons. The first is that they may damage the books further, and the other, is that there are not enough to go around. I have not been into the advanced classes, but I am expecting that they have a better range of materials to use in class.
This day started like all of the others, I arrived in the parking lot, and walked around to the front of the building. I arrived at the classroom a few minutes early, and the door was locked. I waited a few minutes, and Mrs. Qwerty arrived.
The class came in; most of them after the bell had already rang. It took perhaps five more minutes before they were all seated. The students were all given a ditto worksheet, which was the first quiz for the quarter. Because this quarter just started, there was no make-up work for the students to do. In theory, the students could quickly finish the quiz, and then have the rest of the class to relax. This however did not happen. Most of the students spent their time talking with one another, and not focusing on their work.
I worked with two students in this class; “Red,” and “Blue.” Blue would work on a question on the quiz, and then lose focus. I would remind him of his assignment, and get him back on track. Red worked consistently on his work. Most of the questions Red could answer himself, but some he needed help with. Blue however, needed more help. All of the questions could be found in the textbooks that the students had. There were headings in the book which corresponded with the questions in the quiz. I would find the heading, read the paragraph with the answer, and then show the student where to find the answer. It took Blue almost the entire period to finish the quiz, because he was busy talking to other students, and doing anything besides work. Red on the other hand was the first student to finish. He worked diligently, and with little help from me, he quickly finished his assignment. Mrs. Qwerty told him that because he had no make-up work (the previous quarter having recently ended) that he could read, or draw a picture. He decided to draw, and then he proceeded to show me how to make an origami balloon. He told me that he learned how to do it at an after school program, and was excited to teach me something cool that he knew.
The second class mirrored the assignment of the first class. The attitudes were different however. I do not know if it was because it was at the end of the day, or because it was close to summer vacation, but these students were off the walls crazy. I worked with one student, “Green,” who had transferred into this class from a special education classroom. I do not know why this student was in special education, he worked diligently, and intelligently. He did not seem to have any mental defect, or show, at a first encounter at least, that he belonged in a special education classroom. The other students were up walking around, and leaving the classroom without permission. Two of the students got into a fight part way through the class.
Both of the classes are starting a new project, in which they research a person of historical significance, write a report about them, and give an oral presentation about that person’s life. Mrs. Qwerty gave me a paper that all of the students needed to take home and have signed by a parent, and bring back for credit in the class. The paper had all of the due dates, requirements, and rubric for the project. I liked this idea; it gets the parents involved, so that they know when their child’s work is due, and what is expected of them.
I noticed some aspects of Anyon’s theory when I was in class. The Bat Cave subscribes to a tracking theory, with an advanced program, generic program, and special education program. The classes that I work with are both on the generic track. Almost all of these students are minorities, and are part of a working class family. Most of the students in the advanced program are white, or Asian. Everyone else is left behind in the generic or special education level. The conditions of the materials in the generic level classes are in bad shape. All of the books are tattered, and many do not have covers. The students are not allowed to take the books out of the classroom for two reasons. The first is that they may damage the books further, and the other, is that there are not enough to go around. I have not been into the advanced classes, but I am expecting that they have a better range of materials to use in class.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Talking Points 9
1. “Those who appear not to make use of these conditions (supposedly open to all), or who appear to lack the potential to accrue privileges, are systematically devalued as less than full citizens – charged as they are with having the differences that matter.” Kliewer suggests that people with mental disabilities, such as Down syndrome are denied full citizenship rights. This claim has validity. People with Down syndrome should have the same rights as people without any disability. However, at the same time, I do not see how it would be effective to bring students into the classroom that have Down syndrome. I feel that if you are going to participate in a class, then you need to be able to linguistically communicate with your peers. I understand that many people with Down syndrome are intelligent, but basic communication within the classroom is key.
2. “Then, in the following two chapters, I closely analyze the meaning of school citizenship for students with Down syndrome as it relates to (1) literacy development (Chapter 5), of central importance in experiencing school success and (2) friendship formation (Chapter 6), a possible consequence of being recognized as communally valuable.” I believe that these two goals are important for all students, and are vital in the first few years of schooling. Here it makes sense to keep all students, Down syndrome or otherwise, in the same environment. All students need to develop valuable social skills in the early years of schooling. This is a strong argument for keeping all students in the classroom together.
3. “Seven valued patterns for solving problems… (1) logistical mathematical thinking… (2) linguistic capacities… (3) a spatial – representation intelligence… (4) musical intelligence… (5) kinesthetic intelligence… (6) interpersonal intelligence… (7) intrapersonal intelligence.” Society values these seven principles, so it makes sense to teach these in class. Students learn to develop patterns, which are used throughout their lifetime. Kliewer suggests that people with Down syndrome develop patterns differently than normal students do, thus still making them beneficial to society.
I find myself at an intelectual crossroads. After reading Anyon, McLaran and Oakes, I am against tracking students into specific paths, which are dictated by the color of your skin, family net worth, and culture. This reading suggests putting Down syndrome students into mainstream classroom. Anti-tracking thinking would agree with this theory, keeping all students together to benefit everyone. However, I feel that as a student with Down syndrome develops, and students move up in the grade levels, I don’t know how they will be able to cope. I believe that having a conversation is of the upmost importance for students, and in society, and many Down syndrome students cannot do that. I believe that a Down syndrome student in the lower grade levels (i.e. kindergarten) would be beneficial. They will be able to learn some basic socializing skills, but after that I don’t know how many of them could keep up with the work, or function in the classroom.
2. “Then, in the following two chapters, I closely analyze the meaning of school citizenship for students with Down syndrome as it relates to (1) literacy development (Chapter 5), of central importance in experiencing school success and (2) friendship formation (Chapter 6), a possible consequence of being recognized as communally valuable.” I believe that these two goals are important for all students, and are vital in the first few years of schooling. Here it makes sense to keep all students, Down syndrome or otherwise, in the same environment. All students need to develop valuable social skills in the early years of schooling. This is a strong argument for keeping all students in the classroom together.
3. “Seven valued patterns for solving problems… (1) logistical mathematical thinking… (2) linguistic capacities… (3) a spatial – representation intelligence… (4) musical intelligence… (5) kinesthetic intelligence… (6) interpersonal intelligence… (7) intrapersonal intelligence.” Society values these seven principles, so it makes sense to teach these in class. Students learn to develop patterns, which are used throughout their lifetime. Kliewer suggests that people with Down syndrome develop patterns differently than normal students do, thus still making them beneficial to society.
I find myself at an intelectual crossroads. After reading Anyon, McLaran and Oakes, I am against tracking students into specific paths, which are dictated by the color of your skin, family net worth, and culture. This reading suggests putting Down syndrome students into mainstream classroom. Anti-tracking thinking would agree with this theory, keeping all students together to benefit everyone. However, I feel that as a student with Down syndrome develops, and students move up in the grade levels, I don’t know how they will be able to cope. I believe that having a conversation is of the upmost importance for students, and in society, and many Down syndrome students cannot do that. I believe that a Down syndrome student in the lower grade levels (i.e. kindergarten) would be beneficial. They will be able to learn some basic socializing skills, but after that I don’t know how many of them could keep up with the work, or function in the classroom.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Talking Points 8
1. “Bowles and Gintis for example, have argued that students in different social-class backgrounds are rewarded for classroom behaviors that correspond to personality traits allegedly rewarded in the different occupational strata--the working classes for docility and obedience, the managerial classes for initiative and personal assertiveness.” Schools are deciding what a child will do with their life while they are in the fifth grade… What they do in elementary school, will decide what will happen to them for the rest of their lives. To elaborate, this means that the rich white kids will be evaluated highly, and go to superior schools, while poorer students will be left with the lesser schools, and be forced to live a life of mediocrity. The inherent white privilege here is palpable. Anyon even said that there were no minority students in the upper echelon classrooms, proving my point that the white students, who come from parents with money, are afforded an astounding amount of opportunity, while everyone else is left behind.
2. “The foregoing analysis of differences in schoolwork in contrasting social class contexts suggests the following conclusion: the "hidden curriculum" of schoolwork is tacit preparation for relating to the process of production in a particular way.” Anyon is stating that schools are teaching students in particular ways, which will help them further along in life, but will do nothing to foster their advancement in society. The students of the elite are allowed to build cultural capital, and are able to converse with their teacher, while students of the working class are taught the value of following directions. The rich students are being prepared to problem solve, while the working class students are being prepared to take orders, which they will be doing for the rest of their lives.
3. “Teachers made every effort to control the movement of the children, and often shouted, "'Why are you out of your seat??!!" If the children got permission to leave the room, they had to take a written pass with the date and time.” Doesn’t Delpit tell us that we need to be explicit with the rules in order to establish the culture of power? The elite class did not have to deal with a strict teacher, they were allowed more freedoms. Maybe this is because they are privileged, and are already aware of the culture of power, and what is expected of them, and how to utilize what they have in order to attain the best results (i.e. a successful future).
4. “The children had no access to materials.” What? Seriously?
This reading was closely related to the McLaren reading, in that it discusses how different classes utilize different pedagogical approaches to educating members of different classes. The elite get the most effective education, which prepares them to one day rule the country, while at the opposite end of the spectrum, the working class students get prepared to take orders, and are effectively turned into drones, which is what a powerful upper class wants. Anyon enters the theory of a “hidden curriculum” into her discourse on educating the different classes. The “hidden curriculum” is the elevated differences in the way that students are being educated depending on their class status. This reading reflects, and projects the discourse of Johnson, who writes about power and privilege. The people in power, the white people, get the most privilege, white privilege. White privilege will bring you to a better school, and open up more opportunities for you as you build more cultural capital.
2. “The foregoing analysis of differences in schoolwork in contrasting social class contexts suggests the following conclusion: the "hidden curriculum" of schoolwork is tacit preparation for relating to the process of production in a particular way.” Anyon is stating that schools are teaching students in particular ways, which will help them further along in life, but will do nothing to foster their advancement in society. The students of the elite are allowed to build cultural capital, and are able to converse with their teacher, while students of the working class are taught the value of following directions. The rich students are being prepared to problem solve, while the working class students are being prepared to take orders, which they will be doing for the rest of their lives.
3. “Teachers made every effort to control the movement of the children, and often shouted, "'Why are you out of your seat??!!" If the children got permission to leave the room, they had to take a written pass with the date and time.” Doesn’t Delpit tell us that we need to be explicit with the rules in order to establish the culture of power? The elite class did not have to deal with a strict teacher, they were allowed more freedoms. Maybe this is because they are privileged, and are already aware of the culture of power, and what is expected of them, and how to utilize what they have in order to attain the best results (i.e. a successful future).
4. “The children had no access to materials.” What? Seriously?
This reading was closely related to the McLaren reading, in that it discusses how different classes utilize different pedagogical approaches to educating members of different classes. The elite get the most effective education, which prepares them to one day rule the country, while at the opposite end of the spectrum, the working class students get prepared to take orders, and are effectively turned into drones, which is what a powerful upper class wants. Anyon enters the theory of a “hidden curriculum” into her discourse on educating the different classes. The “hidden curriculum” is the elevated differences in the way that students are being educated depending on their class status. This reading reflects, and projects the discourse of Johnson, who writes about power and privilege. The people in power, the white people, get the most privilege, white privilege. White privilege will bring you to a better school, and open up more opportunities for you as you build more cultural capital.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Talking Points 7: Gender Specific Schools
1. “Among advocates of single-sex public education, there are two camps: those who favor separating boys from girls because they are essentially different and those who favor separating boys from girls because they have different social experiences and social needs.” (p. 3) Supposing that boys and girls develop neurologically differently, then in a co-ed classroom, one of the groups (boys or girls) dialogues may be silenced. If there is a female teacher, they may, unwittingly cater to female learning needs, and dismiss the problems of the boys as behavioral or otherwise, and not consider that they indeed may learn differently, because their brains are wired differently.
2. “They discussed how annoying it is when you’re out hunting, to be swarmed by yellow flies. Meanwhile, in Michelle Gay’s fourth-grade class, the girls sang a vigorous rendition of “Always Sisters” and then did a tidy science experiment: pouring red water, blue oil and clear syrup into a plastic cup to test which has the greatest density, then confirming their results with the firsthand knowledge that when you’re doing the dishes after your mother makes fried chicken, the oil always settles on top of the water in the sink.” (p. 5) It sounds to me like these classes are reinforcing traditional gender roles for their male and female students. The boys all had hunting experiences, which are glorified as examples in the class room, while the females all had to relate to doing the dishes at home. This model of teaching enforces the manly stereotypes for the boys, and the home maker stereotype for the females.
3. “While you’d end up with a better-than-random sort, the results would be abysmal, with unacceptably large percentages of students in the wrong place… ‘There are just too many exceptions to the rule.’” (p. 10) While it may seem to some that gender exclusive classrooms may be a good idea, it would be a logistical nightmare. As is said in the text, there are just too many problems that would arise. Separate gendered classrooms are just not practical, at least at the normal public high school level.
If the research is irrefutable, which, according to this reading, I do not believe it is, then it would be beneficial to keep boys and girls separated in school, supposing that it will raise test scores. It would be best to do this at a young age. I believe for this to truly be effective, it would need to be implemented early. Keep students separated while they are in grammar school, where they are developing at different speeds. According to this reading, both boys and girls are developmentally equal at around age 15, or right around the time they should be entering high school. So I propose keeping them separate up to grade 8, so that they can both thrive in their separate environments, and then bring them back together in high school. A fear that I had while reading this article was that students would start separate but equal, but eventually, the school system will begin to favor one group, creating an unequal learning environment for boys and girls. I am left wondering what repercussions a program like this could have in the public realm.
2. “They discussed how annoying it is when you’re out hunting, to be swarmed by yellow flies. Meanwhile, in Michelle Gay’s fourth-grade class, the girls sang a vigorous rendition of “Always Sisters” and then did a tidy science experiment: pouring red water, blue oil and clear syrup into a plastic cup to test which has the greatest density, then confirming their results with the firsthand knowledge that when you’re doing the dishes after your mother makes fried chicken, the oil always settles on top of the water in the sink.” (p. 5) It sounds to me like these classes are reinforcing traditional gender roles for their male and female students. The boys all had hunting experiences, which are glorified as examples in the class room, while the females all had to relate to doing the dishes at home. This model of teaching enforces the manly stereotypes for the boys, and the home maker stereotype for the females.
3. “While you’d end up with a better-than-random sort, the results would be abysmal, with unacceptably large percentages of students in the wrong place… ‘There are just too many exceptions to the rule.’” (p. 10) While it may seem to some that gender exclusive classrooms may be a good idea, it would be a logistical nightmare. As is said in the text, there are just too many problems that would arise. Separate gendered classrooms are just not practical, at least at the normal public high school level.
If the research is irrefutable, which, according to this reading, I do not believe it is, then it would be beneficial to keep boys and girls separated in school, supposing that it will raise test scores. It would be best to do this at a young age. I believe for this to truly be effective, it would need to be implemented early. Keep students separated while they are in grammar school, where they are developing at different speeds. According to this reading, both boys and girls are developmentally equal at around age 15, or right around the time they should be entering high school. So I propose keeping them separate up to grade 8, so that they can both thrive in their separate environments, and then bring them back together in high school. A fear that I had while reading this article was that students would start separate but equal, but eventually, the school system will begin to favor one group, creating an unequal learning environment for boys and girls. I am left wondering what repercussions a program like this could have in the public realm.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Between Barack and a Hard Place
1. “When the perpetrator of a particular act is a person of color, then that entire race is to blame, and placed under suspicion. That does not happen to those people who are white.” This is the epitome of white privilege. White culture, the culture of power, has the ability to blame an entire race for the acts of one or a few individuals. Some African American kids join a gang, and commit a crime, the entire race is blamed and stereotypes, but if a white person shoots up a school, it is the singular act of a mad man. White privilege allows for anonymity in society that is not granted to people of other races.
2. “White privilege allows us to view criminals of the dominant group as individuals, while too often viewing black and brown folk through the lens of a group pathology whenever one of ‘theirs’ violates one of ‘our’ legal or moral norms” This statement reiterates what was said in point one. White privilege allows for a white person to commit a crime as a singular act, white if a person of a different race commits a criminal act; their entire race is to blame.
3. “Job applicants with white sounding names were 50% more likely than job applicants with black sounding names to get a job – do we feel what that means” Another privilege of power, having a white sounding name. This correlates to a reading that we read earlier in the semester, which gave similar statistics. People with black sounding names do not get call backs for job interviews. In order to get a job, you need to subscribe to the culture of power, part of the culture of power, is having a white sounding name, which is considered to be ‘normal.’
Even in a ‘post-racial’ society, where we have a black president, things are still not much better for African Americans. Having a black sounding name means that you will have a harder time getting a call back for a job interview. A person or color committing a crime is incriminating their entire race. We do not live in a post racial society, even though we have a black president. There are still massive problems that stem from white privilege.
2. “White privilege allows us to view criminals of the dominant group as individuals, while too often viewing black and brown folk through the lens of a group pathology whenever one of ‘theirs’ violates one of ‘our’ legal or moral norms” This statement reiterates what was said in point one. White privilege allows for a white person to commit a crime as a singular act, white if a person of a different race commits a criminal act; their entire race is to blame.
3. “Job applicants with white sounding names were 50% more likely than job applicants with black sounding names to get a job – do we feel what that means” Another privilege of power, having a white sounding name. This correlates to a reading that we read earlier in the semester, which gave similar statistics. People with black sounding names do not get call backs for job interviews. In order to get a job, you need to subscribe to the culture of power, part of the culture of power, is having a white sounding name, which is considered to be ‘normal.’
Even in a ‘post-racial’ society, where we have a black president, things are still not much better for African Americans. Having a black sounding name means that you will have a harder time getting a call back for a job interview. A person or color committing a crime is incriminating their entire race. We do not live in a post racial society, even though we have a black president. There are still massive problems that stem from white privilege.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)